So Trump, informed largely by Fox News and guided by his Russian mentor, railed yesterday against the heads of all US intelligence services as being “naive”. Right...

This seems to be the era of people not trusting experts. I see it all the time in the place I work. The average Joe extrapolates the fact that an expert is sometimes wrong, with that means that their own opinion is worth the same amount. Much of this is down to the current mentality of every opinion is valuable that is fostered in the education system.

The 5-year old mind occupying the orange head of the country has decided today that he didn't say what he said yesterday, and that it's all fake news. And there is no way to blame him on the modern education system. His election, perhaps. The poorly educated and all that...

So Trump, informed largely by Fox News and guided by his Russian mentor, railed yesterday against the heads of all US intelligence services as being “naive”. Right...

This seems to be the era of people not trusting experts. I see it all the time in the place I work. The average Joe extrapolates the fact that an expert is sometimes wrong, with that means that their own opinion is worth the same amount. Much of this is down to the current mentality of every opinion is valuable that is fostered in the education system.

Hopefully the populace will grow up a little before Armageddon.

I think it's more that every expert now has an agenda, and that all the experts we hear from say the same thing that turns out wrong, we don't hear the other the other side of the argument (the one that turns out to be correct). And the media does the same. They have an agenda, and filter news. And also that when there isn't an agenda the experts keep changing their minds (e.g. health, is wine good or bad for you), and again there's a media element here, the requirement for new stories. But it's not every in every field. I'm sure we mostly listen to our car mechanic...but ironically they usually are wrong!

I've always thought Herman Cain would be a good Fed chair (although abolishing the Fed would be even better)

Cain grew up in Georgia and graduated from Morehouse College in 1967 with a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics. Cain pursued graduate studies at Purdue University and graduated with a Master of Science in Computer Science in 1971, while also working full-time for the U.S. Department of the Navy. In 1977, he joined Pillsbury Company in Minneapolis where he later became vice president. During the 1980s, his success as a business executive at Burger King prompted Pillsbury Company to appoint him as chairman and CEO of Godfather's Pizza, in which capacity he served from 1986 to 1996.
Cain was chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Omaha Branch from 1989 to 1991. He was deputy chairman, from 1992 to 1994, and chairman, from 1995 to 1996, of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. In 1995, Cain was appointed by Newt Gingrich to the Kemp Commission, and was a senior economic adviser to the Bob Dole presidential campaign. Cain became the CEO of the National Restaurant Association,[14] in which he served as president and CEO from 1996 to 1999. During the presidency of Bill Clinton, Cain publicly opposed the Clinton health care plan of 1993, about which he questioned the president at a town hall meeting. Cain has served as a member of the board of directors of several companies, including Aquila, Inc., Nabisco, Whirlpool, Reader's Digest, and AGCO.

You couldn't want a better Fed chair than that
And I remember Mr Cain appearing at a campaign stop with candidate Trump during the 2016 election cycle, so he's one of us.
Better him than a swamp creature

So Trump, informed largely by Fox News and guided by his Russian mentor, railed yesterday against the heads of all US intelligence services as being “naive”. Right...

This seems to be the era of people not trusting experts. I see it all the time in the place I work. The average Joe extrapolates the fact that an expert is sometimes wrong, with that means that their own opinion is worth the same amount. Much of this is down to the current mentality of every opinion is valuable that is fostered in the education system.

Hopefully the populace will grow up a little before Armageddon.

I think it's more that every expert now has an agenda, and that all the experts we hear from say the same thing that turns out wrong, we don't hear the other the other side of the argument (the one that turns out to be correct). And the media does the same. They have an agenda, and filter news. And also that when there isn't an agenda the experts keep changing their minds (e.g. health, is wine good or bad for you), and again there's a media element here, the requirement for new stories. But it's not every in every field. I'm sure we mostly listen to our car mechanic...but ironically they usually are wrong!

There is a degree of truth: I have experimented with some light consensual tweeting and the demand to generate new content to get followers or whatever overwhelms any discourse. Effectively people are looking for reasons to tweet. I still stand by my initial argument though, and not sure that the media does not present the otherwide. sometimes the BBC seems to present the otherside to be "even" eventhough it is utterly barmy.

Oh...and on the mechanic: if you go around in old expensive cars - what do you expect?

Come on, rmax! I don't know whether you are being serious! Let's suppose you are. There's Side A and Side B. And the BBC support Side A, say. ("Why" is the really interesting question.) So you are saying that they show proponents of Side A, and then for balance they show nutters from Side B. Hmm...

Chief Deputy Whip Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI) talked to the money honey on sunday and said Democrats would support a border wall

Maria Bartiromo: So are you saying you would be poised to agree to a deal with your colleagues on the right to put money forth that goes toward technology, toward more border agents, toward drone technology whatever that may be, as well as a physical barrier in certain areas where it makes sense? Is that what you’re saying?
Rep. Dan Kildee: Sure.

The president is going to build a wall with or without them, so they might as well go along for the ride and share the credit

Come on, rmax! I don't know whether you are being serious! Let's suppose you are. There's Side A and Side B. And the BBC support Side A, say. ("Why" is the really interesting question.) So you are saying that they show proponents of Side A, and then for balance they show nutters from Side B. Hmm...

Pretty much. If I spot something I will post it. The BBC supporting sides is purely who is going to increase the license fee...no secret there.

According to designs it released in September, CBP intends to build 25 miles (40 kilometers) of concrete walls to the height of the existing flood-control levee in Hidalgo County next to the Rio Grande, the river that forms the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas. On top of the concrete walls, CBP will install 18-foot (5.5-meter) steel posts and clear a 150-foot (45-meter) enforcement zone in front.

8Additional details of the possible components of the projects are as follows:
●Levee Wall— The levee wall would be a concrete wall to the approximate height of the levee crest with 18-foot tall bollards installed in the top of the levee wall.
●Border Wall System in Starr County— The bollard wall would be 20- to 30-feet high utilizing 6”x6” concrete filled steel bollards.
●150-foot Enforcement Zone— The enforcement zone would be an area extending from the south/river side of the levee wall or border wall systems approximately 150 feet. All vegetation within the 150-foot enforcement zone will be cleared.
●Gates— Automated vehicle gates would be installed with a minimum height of 18 feet and minimum width of 20 feet. In addition, gates designed to allow for farming equipment would be installed where appropriate and range in width from 40 to 50 feet. All gates will be motorized overhead sliding gates with an enclosed drive and operator system.

rand paul in the senate
and on twitter (a whole bunch of tweets linked up, 10 I think)

I'll be speaking on the senate floor on the McConnell amendment regarding troop withdrawals around 5pm today. Watch live here: https://www.c-span.org/congress/?chamber=senate …
This resolution condemns President Trump for ‘precipitously’ bringing troops home from Afghanistan.
Finally, after 17 years, we have a President bold enough to declare victory and bring our troops home and the warmongers have the gall to claim that coming home, after 17 years, is precipitous?
These same supporters of forever war argue that if we set a timetable for coming home that we are telegraphing to the enemy our plans and our actions are too deliberate.
So, supporters of forever war have defined coming home after 17 years as too precipitous and condemned a planned withdrawal as too deliberate.
Apparently, these warmongers believe you can’t come home quickly or slowly.
The war caucus, Republican and Democrat, agree on one thing – American soldiers must not come home – EVER!
I want to compliment @realDonaldTrump for being bold and brave! We’ve been in Afghanistan for far too long! Let’s stop spending money there and start spending it here at home.
I’m tired of America doing everyone’s fighting. I’m tired of America paying for everyone’s wars! How about we take care of our own homeland? I’m glad @realDonaldTrump isn’t letting everyone take advantage of us! We must fight when needed, but we can’t be the world’s policeman!
The GOP-controlled Senate is about to condemn @POTUS for doing exactly what he promised to do! Why are my colleagues going after @realDonaldTrump for putting America first & wanting to end wars that have gone for far too long? The swamp is unhappy tonight, but America is thrilled